Journal of International Business and Economics
June 2015, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 64-75
ISSN: 2374-2208(Print), 2374-2194(Online)
Copyright © The Author(s). 2015. All Rights Reserved.
Published by American Research Institute for Policy Development
DOI: 10.15640/jibe.v3n1a8
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.15640/ jibe.v3n1a8
The Functional Characteristics of the Global Integrative Model – From a Convergence Program
toward an Integrative Symmetry
Dr. Catalin Popa1, Dr. Imre Reczey2, Dr. Florin Nicolae3 & David Quansah4
Abstract
As the global framework evolved by nowadays it seems that a proper integrative approach based on a
coherent model is still not embraced as a future solid option for the future sustainable development on a
global scale. The political dynamics is still devouring the functional canvas of the international system in all
its dimensions, from economic, financial, politic, social and cultural perspectives. In a previous paper, the
authors reflected the possible strategic route to be on set in order to achieve a global consensus, defining a
proper architecture in political economy side of scientific approach. Considering the holistic and the
analytical modeling approaches, the overtaken study pursues to define the major components structurally
and functionally considered as imperative within a global integrative dynamic model, tending to an equitable
and fair globalization process. The findings will describe the major variables involved and further will
underpin the major differences between pre-conditions framework, the convergence as regional nominal
integrative program and the global integrative framework as final dynamic shape of the worldwide
architecture.
Keywords: globalization, integration, global governance, economic system, financial system
JEL Classification: F02, F15, F42, F60, F63
1. Introduction
1.1. The Convergence and Symmetry Concepts versus Global Integration Concept
The globalization process is defined as being a dynamic stage of global systemic settlements, where the
majority of nations and market or social forces are involved, within a complex cross-cultural, economic, financial and
political cooperation framework (Popa, Ionescu, 2010). Nowadays the questions are not related to the globalization
process definition itself, but more close to the next shape of this model in order to be equitable and functionally
equilibrate (Stiglitz, 2006). In the center of these visions an important role will be assumed by the new architecture of
the global system design, as a future projection of integrative steps overtaken worldwide, toward an integrative model
applied (Dicken, 2011). Calling for a literature review outlines, it can be stated that in major references, the global
integration process is defined as the complex sum of those determined interactions among self-governing sovereign
states, evolving into a complex manner as a shift from the state focused perspective limited or isolated in its actions,
to a more complete or limited unification (Karunaratne, 2002).
1
Coordinator, Business Faculty, Higher Colleges of Technology, United Arab Emirates.
Phone: +40744364632, E-Mail: [email protected]
2
Head of Business Department, ADMC-Higher Colleges of Technology, United Arab Emirates. Phone: +971505593661, E-Mail:
[email protected]
3
Dean of Navigation and Naval Management Faculty, Naval Academy, Romania.
Phone: +40723498579, E-Mail: [email protected]
4
PhD student at British University in Dubai, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
Phone: +971507650827, E-Mail: [email protected]
Popa et al.
65
This road is not particularly defined as global integrative process, but it is usually considered as major a driven
force for the globalization phenomenon itself (Bhagwati, 2004). In this light, the global integrative process is defined
by its successive stages of internal restrictions diminishing, together with the expansion of new external boundaries
both in capital freedom and trade development (Stiglitz, 2003). Hence, the major point in order to underpin a
distinctive shape of a global integrative model is to describe the integration as a particular defined dynamic
convergence process, toward nominal and real values of chosen variables, in order to support an equilibrate and
competitive functioning of a particular nation in relation with its region and, further, with the international
environment (Aulakh, Preet, Schechter, Michael, 2000). As the European Union integration project has shown
already, a quantitative model of nominal convergence is possible to be design, but major problems and nonconformities will pop up when the importance of real convergence parameters will be neglected or miss aligned in the
model design (Baldwin, 2006). If a set of pre-conditions will not be fulfilled, as real and nominal criteria in integration
modeling hypothesis, before embracing the regional convergence path, the integrative endeavors of accessing
countries will be wasted.
The delimitation between pre-conditions, convergence and integrative programs becomes essential in order to
avoid the misalignments between the nominal convergence aiming prescribed values and the harmonized integrative
model, that will be further dynamically shaped by the international count of all evolutions not just quantitative, but
also based on qualitative variables. Becomes obsolete to admit that today European Union counts distinctive
categories segregated among its members, using different rights and bargain powers, with unequal chances to promote
their national interests against the communitarian rules (Baldwin, 2006). Without fulfilling the entire framework of
required pre-conditions, the integration project has been limited to a nominal convergence, considered satisfactory;
but due to differences counted in the pre-accession phase, the less prepared countries (as Romania or Bulgaria),
aligned to these model failed to catch up to middle echelon of European emerging countries, just based mainly on real
variables of regional convergence (Popa, Ionescu, 2010). Furthermore, as the European integrative model has been
excessively focused on the nominal convergence program, the countries from the second emerging echelon (as
Greece or Spain) have faced difficulties in their response capacity to the crisis stimulus, revealing deep weaknesses
both in real and nominal convergence parameters (Popa, Nistor, 2014).
As the past evolutions in global economy and financial system dynamics have depicted the global integration
modeling imperative should be approach priory to any other international analysis and comparison, in order to
promote a process of ,,globalization for all” into a sustainable manner (Stiglitz, 2006). This modeling stage is suppose
to support more accurate any further particular views against a nation or a region, on integrative manner, not as
insulated but widely connected on economic, social, political and cultural international realities, helping in this way
both the global governance strategies and the decision making chain stakeholders, on international markets. Thinking
at that stage, a national variable is viewed as a convergent variable into analysis when is weighted against a model
whilst becomes an integrative element on a global scale when is attached to a dynamic global profile. This dynamic
global profile is suggesting that is no viable nominal targets for any indicator yet to describe the global realities in its
complexity, but will be further determined but the summon evolution of all nations on regions counting on qualitative
category of national symmetry (figure no. 1). As it has been shown into a previous article, Global Integrative Model
(GIM) is important in order to be able to describe the National Integration Symmetry, to be further able to describe a
nation and its growth model, as connected in ratio with the global economic, financial, social and political dimensions
within global network. In conclusion, the convergence should define the national performance in accordance with
nominal parameters usually associated to a regional area, but the symmetry will provide a great opportunity in
analyzing the real parameters of a nation performance, in relation with a dynamic integrative global profile, but more
close to the human, social and cultural needs fulfillment.
1.2. Research Methodology
The research in the paperwork will be mainly based on qualitative analytical and modeling methods of
research, the authors seeking to describe the globalization phenomenon on functionally basis, using the integrative
dynamics and symmetry percepts (Savin-Baden; Major, 2013). The variables involved in the model were identified
from literature review, or from other findings developed by the authors, as result of their previous studies (Popa,
2010, Karunaratne, 2002; Dicken, 2011; Ritzer, 2011; Rodrik, 2011). Within qualitative approach some important
categories were defined as future research basic findings.
66
Journal of International Business and Economics, Vol. 3(1), June 2015
The data collected and the defined concepts were consolidated under functional models, consisting prerequisite findings for the next stages in other quantitative and qualitative studies of making possible the symmetry
processes measurement (Denzin, Lincoln, 2000).
The article major findings will refer first to the integrative concepts definition as global convergence, global
integrative process, and national symmetry. Secondly, the findings will seek to describe the global integrative model,
detailing its functional dimensions, creating the premises for further studies in global governance processes modeling.
Therefore, the findings should be extremely useful for next studies in international strategic settlements in order to
design a globalization process route and a future shape for this complex phenomenon. The model itself will promote
a equilibrate development, together with an adaptive response from international organization to the new challenges
on economic and financial dimensions, considering the real values of social and cultural values In the present research
has been used an analytical qualitative analysis, first to figure the theoretical functional convergence toward nominal
values and, secondly, to show the functional integration process based on its dynamic features and fundamentals. The
findings will be further described under vivid frameworks, fulfilling the major purpose of this article, mainly to offer a
theoretical image against the globalization functional variables, upon both holistic and an analytical perspectives.
2. The Functional Description of the Global Integrative Model (GIM)
2.1. Convergence Program Versus Global Integrative Model
Following the analytical methodology of process modeling, and considering the previous results of research
(Popa, Quansah, Charrim, Durham, 2014), it is a must to identify the major definitions for these process categories.
Into a proper methodological approach are identified two functional dimensions: the static perspective outlined based
on quantitative variables and the dynamic perspective as described by the qualitative criteria (figure no. 1). Valuing
these synthetic ideas, in figure no. 1 has been represented into a holistic perspective the convergence program
relevance based on the global integrative profile meaning and significance. Thus, the suggestive category of the nation
has been placed in the middle of globalization process balancing among two dimensions that defines the integration as
a part of a global functional system, functionally harmonized in all its components: the regional perspective, which is
defined by the static perspective and the global perspective, defined by the integrative worldwide profile. Afterwards,
the nations’ area is priory meant to align itself to a regional harmonized network, based on a nominal convergence
program, as determined by common realities and goals (Benkler, Yochai, 2006).
Figure No. 1: Convergence versus Symmetry in Global Integration Perspective
(Source: Popa, Quansah, Durham, Carrim, 2014)
Hence the convergence is a program relying in its profile upon real indicators that will value the economic
and financial values as regional goals, negotiated on regional level. The European Union model is due to be
mentioned as a convergence program in the beginning, becoming further more ambitious as regional integrative
model, but unfortunately still governed mostly by convergence ideas (Baldwin, 2006). Its disparities and excessive
focusing mainly in nominal parameters have transformed the European
Popa et al.
67
Union project again from a regional integrative model as it was meant to be, to a convergence program, since
political, social and cultural misalignments are marking the present evolution within the system (Spence, 2011; Paul de
Grauwe, 2005). The regional integrative stage is the first step defining the pre-conditions for a further rational global
integrative model. But the nations will be forced just to adhere to the convergence program and will not influent its
shape; the nations will just join pushing its variables toward pre-defined values, for which reason the convergence as
concept can’t be defined as a being a model. The global perspective defined by the integrative worldwide profile is
drafted dynamically as a complex sum of variables’ interactions, harmonized based on national symmetry. Through
the meaning of purpose the nation will both to adhere to a set of variables but to will also be able to influent a future
shape a global model. Therefore, the global integrative model is based on national symmetry concept, defined as the
resultant vector of integration based on a model defined progressively, upon all quantitative and qualitative economic,
social, political but also social and cultural variables. Here European Union assumed a strong mistake in designing the
integrative model as a pre-defined framework, not coming from a natural evolution, but only based on a convergence
program build as an ideal profile, mainly focused in economic and financial dimensions, politically governed, since the
social and cultural sides are still under unsatisfactory integration stages, marked by significant imbalances among its
members (Spence, 2011).
2.2. Functional characteristics of the Global Integrative Model (GIM)
The functional perspective against the Global Integrative Model is drafted in figure no. 2 considering the
most important stages which a nation should go through, in order first to integrate into a regional and global model
(as convergence program) and second, to participate actively into global integrative model design (as national
symmetry fulfillment toward GIM). The GIM functional equation is: ”pre-conditions framework ↔ regional
convergence program ↔ global integration”. Based on this route a nation will first fulfill a set of pre-condition, and
secondly will be integrated into a regional network as considering its comparative and competitive advantages, to be
able in the final stage to integrate on international level, contributing itself to the dynamic global integrative profile
definition. Therefore, in the beginning, a nation should be consolidated on its foundation for fitting into a regional
network, and further into a global integrative model, by fulfilling a set of pre-conditions, considered as the integrative
model hypothesis. Without fulfilling the pre-conditions a nation will be in difficulty to control efficient the integration
process for its own interest, losing the possibility to exploit properly the comparative advantages, and further the
competitive advantages. It will lose the effectiveness of exploiting its own resources and will be in lack of sovereign
deeds, with no possibility to negotiate a proper settlement within region and on international level. These conditions
once fulfilled should be monitored continuously being considered reversible. As work hypothesis in GIM design, the
set of pre-condition will contain: a) governing tools: stability (functional, political and social); legal framework;
functional institutions; social dialogue, and b) capital factors: economic; financial; and social variables (see figure no.
2).
Neglecting the pre-conditions importance, these pillars of national equilibrium can be dynamically disrupted
in one or another of its components due to national or international market conjuncture, with a high impact in the
way of global integrative endeavors. The governing tools will assure the stability pools for a functional society,
without which a nation can’t develop symmetric as for all its citizens’ interest. The capital factor will value the
comparative advantages of a nation and will produce competitiveness, promoting a proper business environment. The
pole of stability is referring first to stability concept, defined as functional, political and social components of internal
environment, based on which a proper and efficient government becomes possible and viable in any kind of
economic or social system adopted (more or less liberal as conception). The functional stability is define as
environment variables that describe the framework of notional freedom of action and decision making, in terms of
autonomy, sovereignty and national independency, against the international environment and internal determinants. It
should be understood that an unstable country will affect the whole area not only the punctual spot of a conflict, that
is why the regional stability is a summoning all the variables in the region and a nation cannot be assess as autarchic
point on a map. The national stability as pre-condition is determined in the second stage by the political stability
category, referring to the political system and settlements and to the legitimacy of the governing system, as acting in
the national interest.
68
Journal of International Business and Economics, Vol. 3(1), June 2015
Good examples of proper governance settlements will be reflected in the power legitimacy and will produce
functional public mechanisms, less embedded by corruption and criminality, but accepted and supported by the social
factor. The political system should not be conditioned by a pre-designed economic model of market based economy
as today promoted, but determined by historical issues and socio-cultural acceptance. Thereafter, the political system
should follow the cultural appetencies and the individual acceptance, with the only requirement in respecting the
human been rights and social values.
Figure no. 2: Functional Relations within the Global Integrative Model
The social stability is about the social perceptions, social satisfaction, related to the society expectations in
relation with the political factor. The political factor, no matter the governing system adopted, should be connected to
the people expectations otherwise it can face legitimacy non-conformities that will inspire a turbulent internal
environment. The relation between social factor and the political system is the key equation for balancing an internal
environment in a functional manner, focused nor or one or other of these variables, but on the national interest
against the individual appetencies. Anyway, will not try here an exhaustive perspective, but will just describe these for
the model drafting imperatives, so will no detail further the stability factors, but will resume underpinning that the
stability pool should be able to provide security, rational wealth allocation, national interest prevalence, health social
environment and human rights fulfillment.
The legal framework is called to provide transparency, equity and functional symmetry within a society, no
matter its governing system has been implemented. The major pillars that define an efficient legal framework should
be: the judicial system independency and autonomy, private property recognition, human right protection. The law
priority against any individual priority is a basic value of any convergence attempt as a common accepted integrative
factor, not just pleading for one political system preferred to another, but for the symmetry achievement is important
to mitigate the individual interests and to protect the national interest as a whole. So, the legal framework will promote
the national interest and transparency in public behavior what is very important for a successful regional and
international symmetry. Functional institutions is a consequence of a government effectiveness in relation with public
management and social needs, achieved by promoting an efficient institutional framework, based on transparency,
apart to corruption, and bureaucracy tendencies. The functionality of public institutions includes judicial system,
public services and internal security structures. In lack of a functional institutional framework the public structures will
be corrupted, led by the individual or group interests, acting against the major social stakeholders.
Popa et al.
69
The functional institutional framework is a strong precondition to identify, even just ideal, a national interest
on all social level, assuring that the society itself is in the center of national actions, policies and strategies, as a
guarantee for a sustainable development. The social dialogue is a pre-condition for a national dialogue settlement,
without which a country and its political system can’t support the national unity and the national identity, in all its
actions overtaken internally or externally. The social variables in the public dialogue should react pro-active and
reactive properly and less restricted, in order to value the national identity, the cultural factor, the social opinions,
showing that the national route, as politically adopted, is a legitimate one (Robertson, 1992). The social dialogue is a
basic variable in prior construction of a national identity, conducting the political decisions toward a sustainable
perspective, following not individual but the national interest, for the future but not only for the present status of
wealth. The capital factors will value the comparative advantages of a nation and will produce competitiveness,
promoting a proper business environment. As an integrative model hypothesis the capital factors should be measured
in terms of its stability, with no sudden variation, but positive trends in such nominal and real economic, financial and
social parameters. Unlikely the convergence program that will follow quantitative goals in ratio with the regional and
international level, the capital factors as pre-conditional framework should just fulfill the proper conditions related to
functional corporate mechanisms, markets mechanism, public management and social security, but related to the
internal stability, not in ratio or comparison with external environment.
The economic factor is the real trigger for wealth increasing spiral and is described by the major economic
indicators evolution that should look consistent, with no sudden variances, and not affected by contagious
phenomenon as corruption, non-ethical business behavior, criminal acts or economic subversive actions. The
perspective will contain the labor and capital productivity, economic growth, trade balance and public budget
consistency. The pre-conditions will aim also the rationales and the legal settlements for market function, for
manufacturing, services and trade activities development, in accordance with the functional institutions and legal basis
established in order to monitor, supervise and coordinate this complete economic framework on a national territory.
The financial factor is basic pre-conditional resort for creating wealth by investments and for creating stability by
controlling the exchange rates, the inflation index and the national capital account. The national financial and
monetary system should be defined in this stage by: a) its components: financial authorities, banking institutions,
financial institutions; b) proper rules: banking law, reporting system, financial market framework; and c) efficient
relationships: monitoring and supervision tools, early warning systems. The financial factor should be governed in
accordance with economic reasons for the beginning and focused on internal wealth creation. Without a consistent
domestic capital creation the nation will be early born as addicted to the international foreign investments, assuming a
very sensitive character on a long run. As pre-condition, the financial capital should be related in the beginning, mostly
to the economy triggers, coming as foreign direct investment, on a controlled manner, kept to evolve together with
the economic system on this stage. In lack of this harmonization the financial system will develop stronger mechanism
than economy needs, going toward speculations dimension, earlier than a nation will afford as resilience and risk
mitigation.
The social factor is the last capital tool called in the pre-condition set, reflecting the human capital value
available for national development, being expressed by the employment rate on a nominal basis, but also but the
matters of expertise, knowledge and engineering as qualitative dimensions of this variable. The labor productivity is
important for the economic development, but also the knowledge is required to promote the competitive advantages
in the region. Thereafter, the national consumption is a strong resort in defining the national wealth and without a
proper employment rate, in lack of reasonable incomes and sustainable consumption, the economic sector can’t create
values neither on supply side or demand side. In conclusion, the pre-conditions consist in a set of minimal functional
and institutional standards that should be fulfilled before any open market policy to be implemented. In this stage the
national integrative strategy is mainly based on trade policies on regional level and the domestic perspective is oriented
more to the economic competitiveness (Aulakh et all, 2000). Even if sounds like pleading against market based
economy, the nations still have to adopt a protective attitude in economic and financial policies, in order to build solid
reactive basis (Aulakh et all, 2000). The financial system and the foreign capital are called to support the economic
frame in transition or emerging phases, looking mainly to finance the basic manufacturing and services system (Bond,
Edmans, Goldstein, 2012).
70
Journal of International Business and Economics, Vol. 3(1), June 2015
Unfortunately, as the previous examples in developing countries have proved in last decades of Washington
Consensus application (Peck, Theodore, Brenner, 2010), the liberal policies adopted generally before pre-conditions
fulfilling, will determine long term disadvantageous and negative effects as corruption, monopoly, improper
distribution of wealth, asymmetry on the markets and speculation in financial matters against real economic
performance (Stiglitz, 2006; Tirole, 2002). Unprotected by functional mechanism and institutions, the nations will not
exploit their comparative and competitive advantages, the free capital movements being able to affect significant, on a
short run, the real economic rationales, before being capable to assume an efficient answer in case of a crisis (Aglietta,
2005; Stiglitz, 2006; Soros, 2008). When both conditions are fulfilled, meaning that the governing tools are
implemented and the capital factors and settled within a functional framework, the nation’s fundaments are onset for
the next stage of a regional convergence program approach, following the networking integrative steps as natural
(Benkler, Yochai, 2006). Basically this is the point from where a nation can shift the protective strategy into a more
liberal perspective admitting that is reasonable ready to face deeper variances in capital flow, harsh fluctuations in
supply and demand game, or a high dynamic in market trade-offs. Thereafter the capital factors will get the
consistency required by a quantitative convergence within a region, and a nation can further assume a future rational
route for the regional integrative frame, based on a convergence program. Here, European Union is a proper example,
setting a precise frame for a regional convergence program based on the quantitative targets and limits as public debt,
budgetary deficit, inflation rate, and exchange rate corridor (Baldwin, 2006). Once a convergence program is adopted,
regional policies are available to be assumed in order to harmonize a common regional position on integrative
manner, following again the example of European Union, where the common market concept has been progressively
followed by a detailed communitarian aquis not just in economic, trade and financial area, but in many other areas, as
the environment, legislation, social policies, consumer rights or technology (Paul de Grauwe, 2005). Without proper
common regional policies, the developing countries will be tempted to act against their own long run interest,
extensively loosening and relaxing their fiscal or economic policies, to be regionally competitive but on a short time
perspective, in order to attract foreign investments with speculative tendencies (Daniels, 2012). Acting under regional
policies, the nations attached to a geographic area will be able to stand for imbalances and to create reasonable wealth
considering their competitive advantages (French, Leyshon, Thrift, 2009). The regional policies will consider fiscal
facilities, capital policies and the trade agreements within a specific area, with common convergent criteria fulfilled.
The governing tools will determine beyond the proper foundation for national functionality within regional
and international context, also the qualitative perspective of the social, cultural and political dimensions. In the next
stage of regional convergence program these governing framework will be enforced and further, will be integrated in
the regional and international dialogue. The addition of all qualitative aspects to the convergence program criteria
fulfillment will practically make the difference toward an integrative model, on regional, and further on global level. In
this stage, where both quantitative (convergence criteria) and qualitative (integrative criteria) variables are involved, a
nation can onset its competitive advantages into a balanced manner, participating fairly in a global wealth distribution
game. But as in the convergence program stage the regional policies implementation has been found as imperative,
then in the global integration phase becomes essential to implement adaptive international policies in order to shape
and to adapt dynamically the national profile to the global market realities. In case of international financial
organizations (as International Monetary Fund notorious case), applying the same quantitative receipts, but just
looking into the convergence program as defined above, will prove the exclusive political perspective – from creditors
toward nations, with no reference to the real need of an assisted nation, on a long run (Stiglitz, 2006; French, Leyshon,
Thrift, 2009). The adaptive international policies should consider each country imperative, goals and internal resorts,
accepting exceptions or limitations in financial programs, with a stronger connection to the economy and to the social
fundaments.
2.3. From a convergence program toward a Global Integrative Model design
Once the pre-condition stage fulfilled and regional convergence program driven, a nation can seek for the
global integrative model, being able both, to provide resilience in the systemic imbalances and to contribute in the
global realities modeling. Following the functional model design this should be the proper moment when a nation can
shift strategically targeting the Global Integrative Model – GIM, as drafted in the figure no. 3 (Popa, Quansah,
Durham, Carrim, 2014). The GIM major particularity is that all the nations can contribute to a global architecture
design, in a sustainable manner, providing consistent realities to an ideal common profile, becoming more pro-active
than reactive in international forum, promoting their national interest in a harmonized manner, not only in the market
levels but also in the cultural, social and political dimensions.
Popa et al.
71
A nation in its evolution has different stages of integrative needs, very similar to an individual evolution,
starting from the basic functional and security needs inquiry (suggested by the pre-conditions framework), continuing
with the wealth accumulation and culture promotion, and finishing with the need for international recognition, as
adapting the Maslow Hierarchy of Needs of institutional scale, these chances depending usually on its historical road
and external conjuncture (Maslow, 1954). But like history has proved already, if these stages are not incorporated into
a global integrative model, then will deviate toward exclusive authority and power focusing and clustering (Hopkins,
2003; Dicken, 2011). That is the major reason for the globalization process governing utility, calling for an
international designed model, in which all the interested parties would be harmonized enough to get global legitimacy
(Stiglitz, 2006).
Figure no. 3: Global Integrative Model (GIM) - The “Inner Diamond” Model (IDM)
(Source: Popa, Quansah, Durham, Carrim, 2014)
Therefore, the nation will be considered in the functional perspective as being an entity of a regional network,
with consistent structures, convergent in its quantitative indicators, stable and coherent in its qualitative variables,
seeking to integrate itself into a larger structure of a global integrative model, where to be able to value, on a larger
scale, its economic, financial and political potential.
72
Journal of International Business and Economics, Vol. 3(1), June 2015
The Global Integrative Model has been shaped and described in detail in a previous article, based on six
factors’ concurrency, determining the shapes of an inner hexagon (national-regional level) and of an outer hexagons
(international level), connected within a complex framework, due to the integration route adopted in the globalization
process.
The model considers as referential in its analysis six integrative variables, as following: the economic and
financial variables, the political factor, the social and cultural dimensions and the knowledge vector, containing into
the same equation both quantitative and qualitative expressions of integration model (Popa, Quansah, Carrim,
Durham, 2014). Therefore, within the model, the EPFSCK outer hexagon represents the Global Integrative Joint
Model suggesting the international framework and the E’P’F’S’C’K’ inner hexagon representing the National Growth
Model, as symmetry qualitative definition of a nation in ratio with the global model variables. The inner hexagon
represents the national symmetry in relation with the global model, in ratio with: economic variable (E’/E), financial
variable (F’/F), political variable (P’/P), social variable (S’/S), cultural variable (C’/C) and knowledge variable (K’/K).
The hexagonal final shape is due to the harmonization of all these ratios, accordingly to the pre-condition framework
and convergence program fulfillment.
Thereafter, the proper integrative steps, identified in relation with the progressive equation of integration ,,preconditions framework ↔ convergence program ↔ global integration”, are the following:
a) The National Symmetry Model as determined by the pre-conditions set and the regional convergence program
fulfillment;
b) The National Growth Model as determined by the national dynamics in relation with the global integrative variables
and
c) Global Integrative Model considered as the final stage of global integration of all nations, were all the interest are
met and the wealth is equilibrate distributed alongside national potential and competitive advantages.
The National Growth Model is determined in its shape first, by the pre-condition set fulfillment and,
secondly, by the convergence program implemented on a regional level, from which point the nations will start
developing rationally, considering all quantitative and qualitative variables. In other words, the pre-conditions
framework and the convergence program are preparing the nation for the next step of global integration, providing
national symmetry. In lack of these steps achieved, the national model will not be symmetric enough to fit into a
further global integrative model, the nation not being able to exploit its potential on international framework, with no
sustainable development perspective on a short and medium run. Furthermore, the Global Integrative Model suggests
that any nation should start in the integrative endeavor from its own realities, to grow rationally, based on progressive
strategies, but not adopting isolated policies which are not adjusted to its own realities or to the region features, but
accordingly with its potential and power at the considered moment, watching for the long run perspective and not
only for the short term advantages.
The nation should growth symmetrically in accordance with the regional variables, first adjusting into the
regional framework and further integrating into the global shape. Further, following to adjust the national growth
model to the global realities two major advantages will be provided: first, the nation will growth accordingly with its
potential and strategies, and secondly, the global model will not be ”pre-designed” as today, but will be a result of all
progressive inter-actions between those nations involved in this complex adaptive and integrative process. That is why
the best shape to suggest these evolution is the inner growing model, as progressively self-adjusted, the coherency and
the consistency of the final model being shaped by the individual national realities harmonized together on sustainable
basis. But it should be outlined here that GIM is not a steady mechanism once acquired and shaped in its entire
components, but will still remain a dynamic one. The pre-conditions ones fulfilled must be followed as permanent
conditional requirements on the basics of any stage of a nations’ development. Any disruption in governance or
capital tools as acquired initially, or any deep volatility in the convergence program can trigger at once the loop of
instability, making the global integrative model further inadequate. In fact, a perfect suggestion of GIM sustainable
performance is to pursue all its variables dynamically, into a holistic and comprehensive image. As presented above,
on the basics of GIM design were considered six elements, similar with the holistic perspective of globalization
processes, in order to keep connected both nominal and real variables, modeled in a qualitative manner (Popa,
Ionescu, 2010). Within the global design were outlined the economic, financial and political variables in relation with
the socio-cultural and knowledge variables of the model, in order to suggest both distinctive dimensions of
globalization, still antagonistic: the quantitative side of globalization and the qualitative one.
Popa et al.
73
Thus, there will be two integrative dimensions considered as imperative for a rational and equitable
globalization process, as following: a) the “Wealth and Power Triangle” (EFP – quantitative perspective of
globalization); and b) the “Knowledge based Society Triangle” (KCS – qualitative perspective of globalization). EFP is
compound by the most common vectors of globalization today, being the most developed countries attribute at the
moment, but facing a strong counter answer from the national interests of developing countries, expressed through
the KCS triangle, were the social and cultural factor are claiming for equity and sustainability, together with symmetric
advantages within a sustainable and knowledge based perspective, where all the interests are worldwide accepted and
legitimate. Attempting to suggest the dynamic feature of these processes, in order to complete the description of the
global integrative model on a functional level, there were depicted the most important driven forces as described in
holistic perspective, namely: the technology (T) – the globalization centrifugal force that spread the progress
worldwide and the sustainable development (SD) – the globalization centripetal force as preserving the durable social
interest, both forces jointly determining the global process dynamics (Popa, Ionescu, 2010). As the model is
suggesting, it will become possible to express the quantitative side of the global integrative model, based on nominal
indexes as for each variable involved. The integration ratios should be further calculated as national/global values,
namely: IE=E’/E (economic integration index), IF=F’/F (financial integration index), IP=P’/P (negotiation power
index), IS=S/S’(social integration ratio), IC=C’/C (inter-cultural integration ratio) and IK=K/K’(knowledge transfer
ratio). Aggregating all these values, under a six parameters regression we can find out the global integration index as a
primary value: GI= IE* IF* IP* IS* IC* IK.
Based on this index value, the first step toward adapted strategies both on a national and global level will be
done. There will not be any universal receipt for economic and financial equilibrium following unrealistic nominal
targets, inappropriate to the national framework and related only to the major international creditors opinion and
interests (Stiglitz, 2006); there will not be any other enforced social or cultural model as being ideal in spite of any
national gaps in perception; and there will not be any different policies from the protective to the most liberal one,
promoted in opposite manner on a crisis time, just depending on the power dimension (Soros, 2008). The only real
admitted values on a global scale should be just those ones determined from a normal growth model, from the inner
evolution toward common values and principles. The foreseen studies will further continue to support the qualitative
design into a more solid and consistent perspective, following to attract more researches into this approach detailing.
3. Summary and Concluding Remarks
In conclusion, the study has investigated the major variables involved with the globalization process,
considered under both holistic and analytical perspectives, and a functional global integrative model has been designed
on a theoretical level, by modeling techniques. The equation of a successful global integrated society has been
identified as a progressive one, built in a globally harmonized formula, defined by the relation between <“economicfinancial propeller” → “value’s equitable spreading” → “satisfaction” → “action legitimacy” → “acceptance”>. This
equation should be reflected in the specific integrative steps as: pre-conditions and convergence program fulfillment
(National Symmetry Model), regional integration dynamic targeting (National Growth Model) and the ultimate stage
within a global harmonized framework (Global Integration Model). The globalization process seems to be governed
now just based on power dimensions but not adapted to the sustainable strategies. The major contribution of this
study is the functional model advanced to describe the globalization process, under an integrative perspective, in order
to offer the opportunity for next approaches in different particular areas, but into a unitary manner, useful for creating
globally applied integrative strategies and methodologies. The major qualitative findings of the present modeling
research are referring to the integrative model importance in the actual global context.
This importance is due to the next major reasons that describe the actual paradoxes reigning nowadays, over the
global architecture:
a) The nations should be in the middle of globalization process, seen as a dynamic process, but not as predefined one;
b) The nations should equally contribute to the global variables definition, with their own realities;
c) Convergence is a program for integrative variables definition and harmonization into a dynamic manner, but
progressively adapted on regional integration area;
d) International organizations should apply adaptive policies ones the rationales are radically different one country to
another and one integrative stage to another.
74
Journal of International Business and Economics, Vol. 3(1), June 2015
Ones defined, the Global Integrative Model should offer the basics of rethinking the global governance, the
international institutional frame being able to review their policies and strategies, to avoid identical solutions for
heterogeneous countries, with different levels of symmetry as identified above. Thus, applying the GIM rationales, the
international organizations, on different levels, would conceive adaptive strategies in international context, as
following:
a) For those countries being in the stage of structural changes the applied strategies will be related to the integrative
pre-conditions fulfillment, following the National Symmetry Models;
b) For emerging countries the applied strategies will be close related to convergence program, following the National
Growth Models;
c) For developed countries the applied strategies will be connected to the integrative model leveling and international
symmetry, providing support for catching up policies and harmonization strategies on a global level.
A future equitable global integration process requires deep shifts in the existing geometry of global governing
architecture, pleading for a more inclusive decision making system, with more balanced power relations and
negotiation rights, favorable for global system flexibility, aggregating national interests and claiming stronger authority
and legitimacy toward sustainable future policies.
References
Aglietta, M., (2005). Macroeconomie Financiere (vol.I & II). Paris, France: Editions la Decouverte.
Aulakh, D., Preet, S., Michael, G. eds. (2000). Rethinking Globalization (S) From Corporate Transnationalism to
Local Interventions. International Political Economy Series. London, UK: Michelman.
Benkler, A.,Yochai, M., (2006). Wealth of Networks. Yale, USA: Yale University Press.
Bergsten, C.F. (2000), The Global Trading System and the Developing Countries. Massechusets, USA: MIT Press.
Bergsten, C.F., (2005), The Eurosystem, the Union and Beyond: The Single Currency and Implication for
Governance, ECB Occasional Paper Series.
Baldwin, R., (2006). The Economics of European Integration. USA: McGraw Education.
Bensidoun I., Ünal-Kesenci, D., (2008). Globalisation in Services: From Measurement to Analysis, OECD Statistics
Working Papers, Paris, France, no.24, pp.14-18.
Bhagwati, J., (2004). In Defence of Globalisation. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Boorman, J., (2006). Global Imbalances and Capital Flows to Emerging Market Countries. Emerging Markets Forum,
UK, September 2006.
Boyett, J.H., Boyett, J.T., (2001). The Guru Guide to the Knowledge Economy. New York, USA: John Wiley& Sons.
Crockane, J., (2005). Financial Markets and Real Economy. NBER Working Paper 11193, Cambridge, USA: NBER.
Bond, P., Edmans, A., Goldstein, I. (2012). Financial Markets and Real Economy. NBER Working Paper 17719,
Cambridge, USA: NBER.
Daniels, J.A., (2012). When Globalization is not good for Less Developed/Developing Countries.
http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/shaw/files/2012/wylf/Economic_Paper_07_Daniels.pdf
Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (eds.) (2000). Handbook of Qualitative Research. London, UK: Sage Publications.
Dicken, P., (2011). Global Shift. (Ed. Sixth,). London, UK: Sage Publications.
Duffie, D., (2008). Innovations in Credit Risk Transfer: Implications for Financial Stability. BIS Working Papers, No.
255.
French, S., Leyshon, A., Thrift, N., (2009). A very geographical crisis: the making and breaking of the 2007-2008
financial crisis. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 2(2), pp. 287-302.
Giddens, A., (1991). The Consequences of Modernity Cambridge: Polity Press.
Hirata, H., Kose, A., Otrok C., Terrones M.E., (2012). Global House Price Fluctuations: Synchronization and
Determinants. NBER Working Paper 18362, Cambridge, USA.
Hopkins, A.G., ed., (2003). Globalization in World History. New York City, NY: Norton.
Karunaratne, N., (2002). Globalization, Crisis Contagion and the Reform of International Financial Architecture. IMF
Discussion Paper No. 300, Washington, USA.
Kébabdjian, G., (1999), Les Théories de l'économie politique international, Seuil, France.
Kose, A. et al, (2007). Financial Globalization: A reappraisal. NBER Working Paper 12484, Cambridge, USA.
Lane, P., Ferretti, M., (2005). Financial Globalization and Exchange Rates. IMF Working Paper 243, Washington,
USA.
Popa et al.
75
Larsson, T., (2001). The Race to the Top: The Real Story of Globalization. Washington, D.C., USA: Cato Institute.
pp. 9.
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York, NY: Harper.
Mattli, W., (1999). The Logic of Regional Integration. Europe and Beyond, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
McKeown, P., (2009). Information Technology and the Networked Economy. Zurich, Switzerland: Jacob Foundation.
Mishkin, F., Eakins S., (2003). Financial Markets and Institutions (front edition). New York, USA: Addison Wesley.
Newlands, D., Hooper, M., (2009). The Global Business Handbook: the Eight Dimensions of International
Management. Burlington, USA: Gower Publishing Ltd.
Oxfam. (2000). The White Paper on Globalization. Parliamentary Briefing 12 (December), Oxfam, Oxford.
Paul de Grauwe, (2005). Economics of Monetary Union. New York, USA: Oxford University Press Inc.
Peck, J., Theodore, N., Brenner, N. (2010). Postneoliberalism and its Malcontents. Antipode, 41(1), 94-116.
Popa, C., (2008). The Globalization Phenomenon and the Financial Institutions. Constanta, Romania: NAC
Publishing House.
Popa, C., Ionescu L.C., (2010). Financial Institutions’ Policies within Globalization Framework. Constanta, Romania:
NAC Publishing House.
Popa, C., Beizadea, H., Nicolae, F., Nistor, F., (2010). A New Model For the Contemporary Market Prices
Mechanism, Annals of DAAAM for 2010, pp 0675, pg. 1349-1351, Vienna, Austria: DAAAM International.
Popa, C., Grigoruț, C., Nistor, F., (2013). The Contemporary Crisis and its Determinative Factors within
Globalization Framework, Ovidius University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, Vol.III, Issue 1, pg. 33-37,
Constanta, Romania: Ovidius University Press.
Popa, C., (2007). An Overview of the New Architecture of International Monetary System, NAC Scientific Bulletin,
vol.10, pp. 403-409, Constanta, Romania: NAC Publishing House, Economic section.
Popa, C., Nistor, F., (2014). The global financial risks analysis in relation with systemic crisis - a qualitative perspective
of the systems’ networking risks, European Journal of Business and Social Studies, vol.17, no.07/October
2014 Zurich, Switzerland: EJBSS.
Popa, C., Quansah, D., Carrim, S., Durham, C., (2014). The Global Integrative Model Overview, European Journal of
Business and Social Studies, vol.17, no.09/December 2014 Zurich, Switzerland: EJBSS.
Robertson, R., (1992). Globalization: social theory and global culture (Reprint. ed.). London: Sage Publications.
Rischard, J.F., (2002). High Noon – 20 Global Problems, 20 Years to Solve Them. New York, USA: Basic BooksPerseus Books Group.
Ritzer, G., (2011). Globalization: The Essentials. NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Rodrik, D., (2007). One Economics, Many Recipes: Globalization, Institutions and Economic Growth, Princeton,
USA: Princeton University Press.
Rodrik, D., (2011). The future of Economic Convergence. Working Paper 17400, National Bureau of Economic
Research, Cambridge, USA: NBER. http://www.nber.org/papers/w17400
Savin-Baden, M., Major, C. (2013). Qualitative Research: The Essential Guide to Theory and Practice. London:
Routledge.
Soros, G., (2004). Political Voice and Become a Catalyst for Change. Washington, USA: Inner Ocean Publishing.
Soros, G., (2008). The new paradigm of the Financial Markets: The Credit Crisis of 2008 and What it Means. New
York, USA: Public Affairs-Perseus Book Group.
Spence, M. (2011). The Next Convergence: The Future of Economic Growth in a Multispeed World, New York,
USA: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Steger, M. (2009). Globalization: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Stiglitz, J.E., (2002). Globalization and its discontents. London, UK: Penguin Books.
Stiglitz, J.E., (2003). Globalization and the economic role of the state in the new millennium. Industrial and Corporate
Change, 12(1), 3-26.
Stiglitz, J.E., (2006), Making Globalization Work, Washington. USA: Penguin.
Sylla, R., Wright, E., (2004). Networks and Financial Systems, Business History Conference. New York, USA.
Tirole, J., (2002). Financial Crises, Liquidity, and the International Monetary System. Princeton, USA: Princeton
University Press.